Nicoli Nattrass

Nattrass received her undergraduate degrees from Stellenbosch University, an honours degree from the University of Cape Town a Master's degree from the University of Natal, and a M.SC and DPhil from Oxford University. [4] She was awarded the Rhodes Scholar in 1984 which funded her doctoral studies.[12]

Between 2002 and 2012, Nattrass published a number of academic articles and books to examine the history, sources, characteristics of AIDS denialism and its impact on HIV prevention and AIDS treatment.[4][5]

In her book The Moral Economy of AIDS in South Africa, written at the height of AIDS denialism, Nattrass repudiated the South African government's claim that antiretroviral drugs (ARVs) were unaffordable. She demonstrated that by not implementing mother to child transmission prevention programs, the cost to treat sick children who acquired AIDS from their mother was greater than to prevent the tragedy from happening.[13]

Nattrass estimated that Mbeki's denialist policies led to the early deaths of more than 340,000 South Africans and 171,000 infections, which she likened to 'genocide'. She attributed the slow and ineffective governmental response to the country's massive AIDS epidemic directly to the influence of the AIDS denialists.[10]

In her 2012 article in Skeptical Inquirer[14] and book The AIDS Conspiracy: Science Fights Back,[15] Nattrass examines the landscape of the AIDS denialist community and identifies four groups of characters: hero scientists (provide scientific credibility); cultropreneurs (promote non-evidence based, unproven alternative treatment); living icons (proof that HIV is not the cause of AIDS) and praise singers (journalists and film makers who promote the cause). She observes that they each fill their own important role in the intractable propagation of the movement and their intertwined and symbiotic relationships are established through their shared anti-science and conspiratorial stance, and beliefs in alternative medicine and treatment. Nattrass describes how pro-science activists fought back by deploying empirical evidence and giving political credibility to refute AIDS conspiracy theories, as part of the crucial project to defend evidence-based medicine and combat pseudoscience.

Nattrass published a 'Commentary' in the South African Journal of Science titled Why are black South African students less likely to consider studying biological sciences?.[16] It reported exploratory data analysis suggesting that attitudes towards wildlife and conservation as well as materialist values were more important than race in predicting study and career choices pertaining to wildlife conservation. Some critics, however, read the Commentary as being based on harmful racial stereotypes and demanded that the Commentary be withdrawn.

This resulted in an episode of cancel culture or what Prof Tomaselli later described as a 'moral panic' over the Nattrass Commentary [17] This was fueled in part by the university Executive who, on 05 June 2020, distanced the institution from the Commentary.[18] The statement misspelled Nattrass's name and the same misspelling was replicated in the Sunday Times, South Africa's largest weekly print newspaper, which named her "Mampara of the Week".[19] - suggesting a direct link between the UCT statement and the Sunday Times condemnation.

The Psychological Society of South Africa (PsySSA) expressed concern about the Commentary and argued it should be withdrawn. The South African Journal of Science resisted such calls and the Academy of Science of South Africa, which hosts the journal, issued a statement defending academic freedom and editorial independence and opted instead to host a special issue to allow debate.[20]

Nattrass responded to UCT's statement by arguing that it bore 'the hallmarks of a rushed, error-filled, hatchet-job'.[21] She gave interviews on radio, for example Talk702 were she defended her piece.[22] Many academics came out in support of Nattrass. The Democratic Alliance, South Africa's official opposition party also came out in support of Nattrass and academic freedom and issued its own statement.[23]

Serialized on the 09 June 2020 and 10 June 2020 Nattrass wrote a two part series titled: "Tumult at UCT". Part 1 was subtitled 'The challenges of transformation'. [24] Part 2 was subtitled 'The dangers of allowing the thought police to take over'.[25]

On 13 June 2020 Hassan Essop and Wahbie Long wrote an opinion piece criticizing the UCT statement for its racially essentializing claims, pointing out that they were not offended by the Nattrass Commentary and that neither the Black Academic Caucus nor the UCT Executive were speaking for them. [26]

On 10 July 2020, the South African Journal of Science published as special issue on the Nattrass Commentary. It comprised a set of rebuttals such as Adesina's critique of the methodology.[27]as well as a reprint of the Essop and Long cited above and an article by a previous head of department of biological sciences (Jeremy Midgley) saying that Nattrass had been addressing a question worth asking. [28] The special issue concluded with a lengthy 'reply to critics' in which Nattrass defended her exploratory research. [29] The publication of the special issue effectively put an end to the public debate.

Nattrass has collaborated with the United Nations Research Institute for Social Development for which she co-authored the South African study for the project ‘Poverty Reduction and Policy Regimes’.[30] Nattrass also was a visiting professor at Jackson Institute for Global Affairs at Yale University.[31]

In 2019 she co-authored the book Inclusive Dualism: Labour-intensive development, decent work and surplus labour in Southern Africa with Jeremy Seekings.[32]

• Nattrass's first book on the subject of AIDS, The Moral Economy of AIDS in South Africa won the 2005 University of Cape Town book award[33] and the 2008 Bill Venter/Altron Literary Award.[34]
• University of Cape Town distinguished teacher award 2001.[4]

• Nicoli Nattrass publications indexed by Google Scholar